Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Daxin Peng
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
Abstract
Salmonella spp. may form biofilm, and bacteria in biofilm are more resistant to drug,
chemical, physical and mechanical stresses, and host immune system. The progress on
biofilm research will be helpful for the development of new tools and strategies to prevent
biofilm-related disease and decontaminate biofilm-derived Salmonella in food produc‐
tion. In this review, we present a comprehensive overview of biofilm formation in
Salmonella, included that (1) the component of Salmonella biofilm, (2) the detection methods
for biofilm, (3) the identification of biofilm-formation-associated genes, (4) the regula‐
tion mechanism of biofilm formation, and (5) virulence or resistance of Salmonella in biofilm.
1. Introduction
Salmonella enteric is an intracellular gram-negative pathogen that infects various hosts, which is
classified into more than 2500 serovars [1]. Many serovars, such as those most commonly
associated with human infections, including Salmonella enteritidis, Salmonella typhimurium, have
a broad host range [2]. In contrast, other serovars, such as Salmonella typhi, Salmonella paraty‐
phi, Salmonella gallinarum, Salmonella choleraesuis, Salmonella abortusovis, and Salmonella dublin,
have restricted host ranges and are associated primarily with one or a few hosts [3]. Salmonella
can cause disease in domestic animals, ranging in severity of asymptom, diarrhea and enteri‐
tis to systemic syndrome, and result in a huge economic loss in pig and poultry industry.
Salmonellosis is also a growing public health concern in both the developed and developing
countries, since nontyphoidal Salmonella disease, a major cause of diarrheal disease globally, is
estimated to cause 93 million enteric infections and 155,000 diarrheal deaths each year [4]. The
© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
232 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
illnesses and outbreaks are most commonly attributed to exposure to contaminated food, and
the eggs, broiler chickens, and pigs are among the top sources [5]. Salmonella often exist not only
as planktonic cells but also as sessile, multicellular forms such as biofilms attached to surfa‐
ces. Biofilm formation is important for the spread of Salmonella because bacteria in the biofilm
are resistant to disinfectants and chemical, physical, and mechanical stresses [6–8]. The biofilm
formation is also contributed to Salmonella virulence, since bacteria in the biofilm are more
resistant to antibiotics and host immune system, resulting in a chronic infection and the
development of Salmonella carrier state [9, 10]. In our review, we present a comprehensive
overview of biofilm formation in Salmonella.
The biofilm formation is a multistep developmental process that always has several distin‐
guishable steps: (a) attachment to the carrier surface, reversible, (b) irreversible attachment,
binding to the surface with the participation of adhesions or exopolysaccharides, (c) the
development of microcolonies, a distinct mushroom shape, (d) the maturation of biofilm
architecture [11, 12], (e) under favorable conditions, the synthesis of martrix compounds
decreases and the matrix is enzymatically cleaved, leading to biofilm dispersion [13]. In natural
environments, Salmonella forms biofilms on plant [14], abiotic surfaces, including plastics,
metal and glass [15–17], meat and meat-processing environments [18, 19]. In addition,
Salmonella can colonize gallstones under laboratory conditions [20], and the Salmonella biofilm
can be directly visualized by confocal micrographs of extracellular matrix on the surface of
human cholesterol gallstones [21]. They can also form biofilms on chicken intestinal epitheli‐
um [22] or HEp-2 cells that are suspended in once-flow-through continuous culture condi‐
tions [23].
The extracellular matrix of Salmonella biofilm is majorly composed of curli (amyloid fim‐
briae), cellulose [24, 25], biofilm-associated protein (Bap) [26], O-antigen capsule [14, 27],
extracellular DNA [28, 29]. The expression pattern of the biofilm is serovar specific and
correlates with contact surface [30]. Curli were first discovered in the late 1980s on Escheri‐
chia coli strains that caused bovine mastitis, and they are mainly involved in adhesion to
surfaces, cell aggregation and biofilm formation. Curli also mediate host cell adhesion and
invasion, and they are potent inducers of the host inflammatory response [12]. The curli protein
is encoded by the divergently transcribed csgBAC (agfBAC) and csgDEFG (agfDEFG) operons
[31, 32]. The csgBAC operon encodes the major structural subunit, CsgA, and the surface-
exposed nucleator protein CsgB. A third gene, csgC, is in the csgBAC operon, but no tran‐
script for csgC has been detected in curli biogenesis [32]. The other study shows that both CsgC
and CsgE facilitate extracellular thin aggregative fimbriae synthesis in Salmonella enteritidis
[33]. The csgDEFG operon encodes accessory proteins required for curli assembly. The csgD
gene encodes a transcriptional regulator belonging to the LuxR family, CsgD, for active
transcription of csgBAC promoter [24]. Although Giaouris et al. [34] found that CsgF was
expressed in biofilm growth when compared with planktonic and biofilm cells of Salmonella
enteritidis on stainless steel surface, the function of csgF and csgG genes has not been re‐
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 233
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
biofilms, the spectrofluorometric assay provides a more sensitive method for quantification
and characterization of bacterial biofilms [45].
The overnight cultures of bacteria are diluted 1:100 in the diluted TSB. Two milliliters of each
bacterial suspension are added into borosilicate glass tubes and incubated at 28°C for 48 h.
Then, the liquid is decanted and the tubes are washed gently three times with distilled water.
Two ml of 0.4% crystal violet (v/v) are added into each tube and stained at room tempera‐
ture for 20 min. The stained biofilm is observed at the liquid–air interface on the glass test tube
walls or at the bottom of the tube [46]. The glass tubes may also be incubated at 37°C at
200 rpm by using an orbital shaker, and biofilm is observed at interphase without staining [47].
The overnight culture (1:100 diluted in TSB) is inoculated into 3 ml of fresh TSB in a 6-well
plate containing sterile polystyrene coverslip (20 × 20 mm). After incubation at 28°C for 24
or 48 h without agitation, the coverslips are removed carefully, treated with cetylpyridinium
chloride (10 mM) for 30 s, rinsed with distilled water and air dried for 20–30 min. After fixation
by gentle heating, the coverslips are stained with a mixture of saturated aqueous Congo red
solution and 10% Tween-80 (2:1, V/V) for 30 min and rinsed with distilled water. After staining
with 10% (v/v) Ziehl carbol fuchsin for 6 min and rinsing in distilled water, the coverslips are
air dried and mounted on slides [48]. Under a light microscope, bacterial cells on slides show
purple staining, while the exopolysaccharides of biofilm show pink staining [46].
The coverslips with cultured bacteria are fixed in 3% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M phosphate-
buffered saline at 4°C for 2 h. The samples are then dehydrated with increasing concentra‐
tions of ethanol (50, 70, 80, 90, and 100%) followed by isoamyl acetate (100%), each for 15 min.
The samples are critical point dried for 5 h, coated with gold palladium alloy, and observed
under a field emission scanning electron microscope [49]. The biofilm-formation strain exhibits
increased clusters of bacteria cells with curli fimbriae and has meshwork-like structures
surrounding the cell surfaces.
LB agar plate without salt supplemented with 40 mg/L Congo red and 20 mg/L brilliant blue
is used to determine the Congo red-binding property of the colonies. LB agar plate supple‐
mented with 200 mg/L calcofluor (fluorescent brightener) is used to determine the cellulose
production by comparing the fluorescence of the test strains under UV light [49]. Biofilm of
Salmonella is mainly composed of curli and cellulose, and Salmonella strains were grouped into
distinct morphotypes according to Congo red binding: (a) red, dry, and rough indicating curli
and cellulose production (RDAR), (b) brown, dry, and rough, indicating a lack of cellulose
synthesis (BDAR), (c) pink, dry, and rough, indicating a defect in curli expression (PDAR), (d)
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 235
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
smooth, brown, and mucoid, indicating a lack of cellulose synthesis but overproduced capsular
polysaccharide (SBAM), and (e) smooth and white, indicating a lack of both curli and cellulose
production (SAW) [19, 31, 50].
The most common biofilm-formation–associated genes are the genes encode adhesins. The
best characterized of the Salmonella fimbriae is type-1 fimbriae. This fimbrial type is encoded
by the fim gene cluster and is assembled by the chaperone–usher system [52]. The fimA gene
encodes the major structural subunit, while the fimH gene encodes the adhesin protein that is
located at the tip of the assembled fimbrial structure and mediates binding to the receptor. The
FimH adhesin is involved in biofilm formation on HEp-2 tissue culture cells, murine intesti‐
nal epithelium, and chicken intestinal epithelium [22, 23]. The long polar fimbriae (Lpf) are
encoded by the lpfABCDE genes and have been implicated in the colonization of the murine
intestinal mucosa [53, 54]. Plasmid-encoded fimbriae (Pef) are encoded on the 90-kb Salmonel‐
la virulence plasmid and are majorly encoded by pefBCD, orf5, and orf6 genes. Both Lpf and
Pef contribute to the early steps of biofilm formation [55]. Salmonella enteritidis produce a
variety of potentially adherent fimbrial types including SEF14 (SefA), SEF17 (CsgA), SEF18
(SefD), and SEF21 (type I, FimA), the role of each fimbrial in biofilm formation is different. The
SEF17 encoded by csgA gene stabilize cell–cell interactions during biofilm formation, while
SEF21 fimbriae may involve cell surface adherence [56]. SadA is trimeric autotransporter
adhesin of Salmonella typhimurium, the expression of SadA resulted in cell aggregation, biofilm
formation, and increased adhesion to human intestinal Caco-2 epithelial cells [57]. Salmonella
may persist on post-harvest lettuce during cold storage, the genes stfC, bcsA, misL, and yidR,
encoding a fimbrial outer membrane usher, a cellulose synthase catalytic subunit, an adhe‐
sin of the autotransporter family expressed from the Salmonella pathogenicity island-3, and a
putative ATP-/GTP-binding protein, respectively, have a role in persistence of the pathogen.
The bcsA, misL, and yidR knockout mutants are impaired in attachment and biofilm forma‐
tion, suggesting that these functions are required for biofilm formation [58].
Salmonella flagella are not required for the formation of the multicellular morphotype on plates.
However, the global behavior of the bacterial community on air–liquid, surface–liquid, or cell–
236 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
liquid interfaces is changed in the absence of flagella. In a mutant lacking flagella and thin
aggregative fimbriae, the contribution of the latter to the multicellular morphotype is
dominant [59]. Biofilm formation of an flgK mutant in meat and poultry broths and their
attachment on surfaces of stainless steel and glass are significantly reduced compared with
that of the wild-type strain, suggest that expression of flagella could be involved in biofilm
formation and attachment of Salmonella on contact surfaces [60]. The presence of the flagellar
filament enhances binding and biofilm formation in the presence of bile, while flagellar
motility and expression of type-1 fimbriae were unimportant in biofilm formation on choles‐
terol gallstones [61].
Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) synthesis also involves the biofilm formation of Salmonella. Two Tn5
insertion mutations in genes that are involved in ddhC and waaG result in diminished
expression of colony rugosity. Both mutants have impaired biofilm formation when grown in
rich medium with low osmolarity, they constitutively form larger amounts of biofilms when
the growth medium was supplemented with either glucose or a combination of glucose and
NaCl [49]. The rfbA gene also involve in lipopolysaccharide biosynthesis. Biofilm formation
by the rfbA mutant in meat and poultry broths and their attachment on surfaces of stainless
steel and glass is significantly reduced [60]. Using transposon mutagenesis, the genes metE,
ompR, rpoS, rfaG, rfaJ, rfaK, rfaP, rfbH, rhlE, spiA, and steB are found to be associated with biofilm
formation of Salmonella enteritidis [66, 67]. When eight mutants with knockout of genes ompR,
rpoS, rfaG, rfbH, rhlE, metE, spiA, or steB from the Salmonella pullorum are constructed. Only the
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 237
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
ompR mutant showed a complete loss of production of curli and biofilm formation. The other
mutants showed a modified production of curli and cellulose with less effect related to biofilm
formation [68]. Therefore, an integral LPS, at both the O-antigen and core polysaccharide
levels, are important in the modulation of curli protein and cellulose production, as well as in
biofilm formation.
Biofilm formation is majorly regulated by CsgD protein, a regulator belonging to the LuxR
family [69]. CsgD has an N-terminal receiver domain with a conserved aspartate (D59) as a
putative target site for phosphorylation and a C-terminal LuxR-like helix-turn-helix DNA
binding motif. The unphosphorylated CsgD directly binds the csgBA and adrA promoter
regions to activate transcription [70]. Multiple factors bind to the promoter sequence of csgD
and regulate its transcription, such as OmpR, RpoS, RpoE, integration host factor (IHF),
histone-like nucleoid structuring protein (H-NS), and MlrA. OmpR is one of first discovered
to be required for csgD transcription [71]. Six binding sites (D1–D6) for OmpR are identified
in csgD promoter regions. Binding of OmpR-P to D2 centered immediately upstream of D1 is
proposed to repress promoter activity. IHF competes with OmpR-P for binding at its up‐
stream site IHF1, which overlaps with D3–D6 and thereby activate the transcription of csgD
[72]. The mutant of ompR in Salmonella enteritidis and Salmonella pullorum has inability to
produce cellulose, curli, and biofilm [68, 73]. RpoS, encodes an alternative sigma factor of RNA
polymerase, is critical for bacterial endurance under the most-stressful conditions, including
stationary-phase entrance and host adaptation. RpoS is required for transcriptional activa‐
tion of the csgD promoter in Salmonella typhimurium strains that rdar morphotype are normal‐
ly expressed at low temperature [31]. However, in two Salmonella typhimurium strains,
spontaneous mutants are found forming rdar colonies independent of temperature, the
regulation of csgD is independent of rpoS [71]. Partially independent of rpoS for regulation of
csgD is observed in Salmonella enteritidis. The rpoS mutant in Salmonella pullorum also shows
similar biofilm forming ability as the wild-type strain [68], suggests that another sigma factor
may recognize the csgD promoter. RpoE is an another regulator in the expression of thin
aggregative fimbriae in Salmonella [74], since the rpoE deletion mutant shows significantly
reduced amounts of csgD expression and modulated biofilm formation. Compared the
expression of six different Sigma factors during biofilm formation in a rpoS-independent
biofilm-formation strain, the expression of rpoE gene was the highest, and the rpoE mutant
could not produce biofilm [75]. Therefore, RpoE acts as a regulator for csgD expression. IHF
is a histone-like heterodimeric protein composed of two homologous subunits. IHF interacts
with a define DNA sequence that has a supportive A-tract upstream of the consensus sequence
by binding to the minor groove of the DNA. The ihf mutants show altered and reduced biofilm
morphotypes on Congo Red agar plates [72]. H-NS prefers to bind AT-rich sites in the
intergenic csgBAC and csgDEFG regions and causes moderate activation of csgD promoter. The
inactivation of hns gene result in reduced expression of the rdar morphotype on agar plate [72].
MlrA (MerR-like regulator) acts directly or indirectly on the csgD promoter, the mlrA mu‐
238 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
CsgD synthesis is also regulated at the post-transcriptional level by sRNA. sRNAs have
emerged as a diverse group of trans- or cis-encoded regulatory molecules of approximately
50–250 nt in size. The RNA chaperone Hfq protects sRNAs form degradation and facilitates
their binding to the target mRNAs. All these sRNA may negatively regulate csgD gene
expression by binding to the overlapping 5′-region of the transcript, masking the ribosome
binding site, resulting in the inhibition of translation or the degradation of mRNA [82]. In
Escherichia coli, sRNAs, OmrA/B, McaS, RprA, and GcvB are identified, which downregulate
CsgD translation [83]. In E. coli and Salmonella, RydC’s 5′-domain interacts with csgD mRNA
translation initiation signals to prevent initiation, stimulation of RydC expression reduces
biofilm formation by impairing curli synthesis [84]. Surprisingly, two Hfq-dependent sRNAs
(ArcZ and SdsR) are responsible for positively regulation of rdar morphotype expression in
Salmonella typhimurium [85]. Salmonella biofilm development depends on the phosphoryla‐
tion status of RcsB. The unphosphorylated RcsB is essential to activate the expression of the
biofilm matrix compounds. The inhibition of biofilm development by phosphorylated RcsB is
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 239
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
due to the repression of CsgD expression, through a mechanism dependent on the accumula‐
tion of the sRNA RprA [86].
Biofilm formation may involve in the virulence of Salmonella. Salmonella enteritidis stains
isolated from either the environment, dairy products, or infected patients are divided into two
groups on the basis of their virulence (50% lethal dose) in chickens infected intraperitoneally.
Only the virulent strains produce aggregates and formed visible filaments attached to the glass
tube [47]. Further study confirms that the virulence of the biofilm-producing strain in infected
chickens increases proportionally to the amount of stored glycogen, suggesting a possible role
of the glycogen depot in the virulence of Salmonella enteritidis [89]. When tested for infection
in Caco-2 cells and HEp-2 cells, the more virulent strains of Salmonella enteritidis, which are
biofilm producers in adherence test medium, are able to disrupt monolayers. In contrast, the
low-virulence strains of Salmonella enteritidis, which do not produce biofilms in adherence test
medium, have no effect on the same cells. The high-virulence Salmonella enteritidis strains
incubated under optimum biofilm-forming conditions may release a soluble factor, which
enables the disruption of the integrity of Caco-2 monolayers [90]. The relationship between
biofilm-forming ability and the pathogenicity is also evaluated in Salmonella pullorum.
Although the virulence of Salmonella pullorum strains is independent of their ability of biofilm
formation, prior growth as a biofilm for a biofilm producer of Salmonella pullorum leads to
enhanced virulence in chickens, suggested that biofilm formation may be one of important
virulence factor for Salmonella pullorum infection [46].
The csgBAC operon is required for curli biosynthesis in Salmonella. The csgA mutation is not
reduced in ability to attach or colonize alfalfa sprouts, whereas the csgB mutation is reduced.
Thus, csgB alone can play a role in attachment of Salmonella to plant tissue [91]. Competitive
infection experiments in mice shows that csgA mutant cells outcompeted rdar-positive wild-
type cells, indicating that aggregation via the rdar morphotype is not a virulence adaptation
in Salmonella typhimurium. Furthermore, in vivo imaging experiments show that thin aggre‐
gative fimbriae genes are not expressed during infection but are expressed once Salmonella was
passed out of the mice into the feces [92]. However, Salmonella typhimurium strains isolated
from water buffalo calves affected by lethal gastroenteritis are tested in vivo in a mouse model
of mixed infection. The most pathogenic strain is characterized by a high number of viru‐
lence factors and the presence of the locus csgA, coding for a thin aggregative fimbria [93].
240 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
The bcsABZC and bcsEFG operons are required for cellulose biosynthesis in Salmonella.
Bacterial adherence and invasion assays of eukaryotic cells and in vivo virulence studies of
cellulose-deficient mutants of bcsC and bcsE genes indicate that the production of cellulose is
not involved in the virulence of Salmonella enteritidis. However, cellulose-deficient mutants are
more sensitive to chlorine treatments, suggesting that cellulose production and biofilm
formation may be an important factor for the survival of S. enteritidis on surface environ‐
ments [36]. Salmonella typhimurium makes cellulose when inside macrophages. An attenuat‐
ed mutant lacking the mgtC gene exhibits increased cellulose levels due to increased expression
of the cellulose synthase gene bcsA and of cyclic diguanylate, the allosteric activator of the BcsA
protein. Inactivation of bcsA restore wild-type virulence to the Salmonella mgtC mutant,
indicating that Salmonella promotes virulence by repressing cellulose production [94].
BapA, a large cell-surface protein, is required for biofilm formation by Salmonella. Studies on
the contribution of BapA to Salmonella enteritidis pathogenesis reveal that orally inoculated
animals with a bapA-deficient strain survived longer than those inoculated with the wild-type
strain. Also, a bapA mutant strain showed a significantly lower colonization rate at the
intestinal cell barrier and consequently a decreased efficiency for organ invasion compared
with the wild-type strain [26]. Osmoregulated periplasmic glucans (OPGs) are major
periplasmic constituents of Gram-negative bacteria. An opgGH mutant strain in Salmonella
typhimurium, which is defective in OPG biosynthesis, severely impaires biofilm formation. The
opgGH mutant strain poorly colonizes mouse organs when introduced orally along with the
wild-type strain [95].
Besides, the constitutional components of biofilm, there are many regulation proteins involved
in both biofilm formation and virulence. An ompR mutant of Salmonella enteritidis has no ability
to produce cellulose, curli, and biofilm and shows similar adherence percentage to and
invasion percentage of epithelial cells as wild-type strain. Intraperitoneal challenge of bacteria
in BALB/c mice reveals that the ompR mutant strain is significant attenuated [73]. A spiA gene
mutant shows reduced biofilm formation and significantly decreased curli production, and
reduced intracellular proliferation of macrophages during the biofilm phase. In addition, the
spiA mutant was attenuated in a mouse model in both the exponential growth and biofilm
phases [67]. Deletion of genes ompR and spiA in Salmonell pullorum strains contribute to
attenuation of virulence in 1-day-old chickens [68]. DksA is a conserved gram-negative
regulator that binds directly to the RNA polymerase secondary channel. In Salmonella
typhimurium, expression of the dksA gene is induced during the logarithmic phase and DksA
plays an important role in motility and biofilm formation. DksA positively regulates the
Salmonella pathogenicity island 1 and motility-chemotaxis genes and is necessary for Salmonella
typhimurium invasion of human epithelial cells and uptake by macrophages. The dksA gene is
induced at the midcecum during the early stage of the infection and required for gastrointes‐
tinal colonization and systemic infection in a colitis mouse model [96].
emrAB, mdfA, mdtK, and macAB are compromised in their ability to form biofilms. The mutants
expressed significantly less csgB or csgD than wild type, indicating that loss of all multidrug
resistance efflux pumps of Salmonella typhimurium results in impaired ability to form a
biofilm [97]. Further study confirms that mutants of Salmonella typhimurium that lack TolC or
AcrB, but surprisingly not AcrA, are compromised in their ability to form biofilms. The biofilm
defect results from transcriptional repression of curli biosynthesis genes and consequent
inhibition of production of curli. Therefore, the inhibition of efflux is a promising antibiofilm
strategy [98]. However, recent studies offer contradictory findings about the role of multi‐
drug efflux pumps in bacterial biofilm development. When no selective pressure is applied,
Salmonella typhimurium is able to produce biofilms even when the AcrAB efflux pumps are
inactivated. Upon exposure to chloramphenicol, the formation of biofilms on solid surfaces as
well as the production of curli are either reduced or delayed more significantly in both AcrA
and AcrAB mutants, implying that the use of efflux pump inhibitors to prevent biofilm
formation is not a general solution and that combined treatments might be more efficient [99].
Triclosan is a potent biocide that is included in a diverse range of products. Salmonella biofilm-
derived cells are more resistant to Triclosan. Within biofilms, triclosan upregulate the
transcription of acrAB, marA, bcsA, and bcsE genes. Thus, Salmonella within biofilms could
experience reduced influx, increased efflux and enhanced exopolysaccharides production. The
data suggest that tolerance of Salmonella towards triclosan in the biofilm is attributed to low
diffusion through the extracellular matrix, while changes of gene expression might provide
further resistance to triclosan and to other antimicrobials [100].
In summary, Salmonella biofilm formation is major controlled by CsgD regulatory network and
regulated by multiple transcriptional factors, c-di-GMP, and sRNAs. More and more genes are
found to be associated with both biofilm formation and virulence. Dissection of their func‐
tion and relationship will helpful for development of new tools and strategies to prevent
biofilm-related disease and decontaminate biofilm-derived Salmonella in food production.
Author details
Daxin Peng
References
[1] Popoff MY, Bockemuhl J, Gheesling LL. Supplement 2002 (no. 46) to the Kauffmann-
White scheme. Res Microbiol 2004,155:568–570.
242 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
[2] Foley SL, Lynne AM, Nayak R. Salmonella challenges: prevalence in swine and poultry
and potential pathogenicity of such isolates. J Anim Sci 2008,86:E149–162.
[3] Uzzau S, Brown DJ, Wallis T, Rubino S, Leori G, Bernard S, et al. Host adapted serotypes
of Salmonella enterica. Epidemiol Infect 2000,125:229–255.
[4] Majowicz SE, Musto J, Scallan E, Angulo FJ, Kirk M, O’Brien SJ, et al. The global burden
of nontyphoidal Salmonella gastroenteritis. Clin Infect Dis 2010,50:882–889.
[5] Pires SM, Vieira AR, Hald T, Cole D. Source attribution of human salmonellosis: an
overview of methods and estimates. Foodborne Pathog Dis 2014,11:667–676.
[7] Scher K, Romling U, Yaron S. Effect of heat, acidification, and chlorination on Salmonella
enterica serovar typhimurium cells in a biofilm formed at the air-liquid interface. Appl
Environ Microbiol 2005,71:1163–1168.
[8] Joseph B, Otta SK, Karunasagar I, Karunasagar I. Biofilm formation by salmonella spp.
on food contact surfaces and their sensitivity to sanitizers. Int J Food Microbiol
2001,64:367–372.
[9] Gonzalez-Escobedo G, Marshall JM, Gunn JS. Chronic and acute infection of the gall
bladder by Salmonella typhi: understanding the carrier state. Nat Rev Microbiol 2011,9:9–
14.
[11] Donlan RM. Biofilm formation: a clinically relevant microbiological process. Clin Infect
Dis 2001,33:1387–1392.
[12] Barnhart MM, Chapman MR. Curli biogenesis and function. Annu Rev Microbiol
2006,60:131–147.
[14] Barak JD, Jahn CE, Gibson DL, Charkowski AO. The role of cellulose and O-antigen
capsule in the colonization of plants by Salmonella enterica. Mol Plant Microbe Interact
2007,20:1083–1091.
[15] Brandl MT. Fitness of human enteric pathogens on plants and implications for food
safety. Annu Rev Phytopathol 2006,44:367–392.
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 243
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
[16] Hood SK, Zottola EA. Adherence to stainless steel by foodborne microorganisms
during growth in model food systems. Int J Food Microbiol 1997,37:145–153.
[17] Momba MN, Kaleni P. Regrowth and survival of indicator microorganisms on the
surfaces of household containers used for the storage of drinking water in rural
communities of South Africa. Water Res 2002,36:3023–3028.
[19] Solomon EB, Niemira BA, Sapers GM, Annous BA. Biofilm formation, cellulose
production, and curli biosynthesis by Salmonella originating from produce, animal, and
clinical sources. J Food Prot 2005,68:906–912.
[20] Prouty AM, Schwesinger WH, Gunn JS. Biofilm formation and interaction with the
surfaces of gallstones by Salmonella spp. Infect Immun 2002,70:2640–2649.
[21] Marshall JM, Flechtner AD, La Perle KM, Gunn JS. Visualization of extracellular matrix
components within sectioned Salmonella biofilms on the surface of human gallstones.
Plos One 2014,9:e89243.
[22] Ledeboer NA, Jones BD. Exopolysaccharide sugars contribute to biofilm formation by
Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium on HEp-2 cells and chicken intestinal epithe‐
lium. J Bacteriol 2005,187:3214–3226.
[23] Boddicker JD, Ledeboer NA, Jagnow J, Jones BD, Clegg S. Differential binding to and
biofilm formation on, HEp-2 cells by Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium is
dependent upon allelic variation in the fimH gene of the fim gene cluster. Mol Microbiol
2002,45:1255–1265.
[24] Gerstel U, Romling U. The csgD promoter, a control unit for biofilm formation in
Salmonella typhimurium. Res Microbiol 2003,154:659–667.
[26] Latasa C, Roux A, Toledo-Arana A, Ghigo JM, Gamazo C, Penades JR, et al. BapA, a
large secreted protein required for biofilm formation and host colonization of Salmonella
enterica serovar Enteritidis. Mol Microbiol 2005,58:1322–1339.
[27] Gibson DL, White AP, Snyder SD, Martin S, Heiss C, Azadi P, et al. Salmonella produ‐
ces an O-antigen capsule regulated by AgfD and important for environmental
persistence. J Bacteriol 2006,188:7722–7730.
[28] Johnson L, Horsman SR, Charron-Mazenod L, Turnbull AL, Mulcahy H, Surette MG,
et al. Extracellular DNA-induced antimicrobial peptide resistance in Salmonella enterica
serovar Typhimurium. BMC Microbiol 2013,13:115.
244 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
[31] Romling U, Bian Z, Hammar M, Sierralta WD, Normark S. Curli fibers are highly
conserved between Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli with respect to operon
structure and regulation. J Bacteriol 1998,180:722–731.
[32] Collinson SK, Clouthier SC, Doran JL, Banser PA, Kay WW. Salmonella enteritidis
agfBAC operon encoding thin, aggregative fimbriae. J Bacteriol 1996,178:662–667.
[33] Gibson DL, White AP, Rajotte CM, Kay WW. AgfC and AgfE facilitate extracellular
thin aggregative fimbriae synthesis in Salmonella enteritidis. Microbiology 2007,153:1131–
1140.
[36] Solano C, Garcia B, Valle J, Berasain C, Ghigo JM, Gamazo C, et al. Genetic analysis of
Salmonella enteritidis biofilm formation: critical role of cellulose. Mol Microbiol
2002,43:793–808.
[37] Garcia B, Latasa C, Solano C, Garcia-del Portillo F, Gamazo C, Lasa I. Role of the GGDEF
protein family in Salmonella cellulose biosynthesis and biofilm formation. Mol Microbiol
2004,54:264–277.
[38] Simm R, Fetherston JD, Kader A, Romling U, Perry RD. Phenotypic convergence
mediated by GGDEF-domain-containing proteins. J Bacteriol 2005,187:6816–6823.
[40] Biswas R, Agarwal RK, Bhilegaonkar KN, Kumar A, Nambiar P, Rawat S, et al. Cloning
and sequencing of biofilm-associated protein (bapA) gene and its occurrence in
different serotypes of Salmonella. Lett Appl Microbiol 2011,52:138–143.
[41] Anriany YA, Weiner RM, Johnson JA, De Rezende CE, Joseph SW. Salmonella enterica
serovar Typhimurium DT104 displays a rugose phenotype. Appl Environ Microbiol
2001,67:4048–4056.
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 245
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
[42] Crawford RW, Gibson DL, Kay WW, Gunn JS. Identification of a bile-induced exopo‐
lysaccharide required for Salmonella biofilm formation on gallstone surfaces. Infect
Immun 2008,76:5341–5349.
[47] Solano C, Sesma B, Alvarez M, Humphrey TJ, Thorns CJ, Gamazo C. Discrimination of
strains of Salmonella enteritidis with differing levels of virulence by an in vitro glass
adherence test. J Clin Microbiol 1998,36:674–678.
[48] Harrison-Balestra C, Cazzaniga AL, Davis SC, Mertz PM. A wound-isolated Pseudo‐
monas aeruginosa grows a biofilm in vitro within 10 hours and is visualized by light
microscopy. Dermatol Surg 2003,29:631–635.
[49] Anriany Y, Sahu SN, Wessels KR, McCann LM, Joseph SW. Alteration of the rugose
phenotype in waaG and ddhC mutants of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium
DT104 is associated with inverse production of curli and cellulose. Appl Environ
Microbiol 2006,72:5002–5012.
[51] Niemira BA, Solomon EB. Sensitivity of planktonic and biofilm-associated Salmonella
spp. to ionizing radiation. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005,71:2732–2736.
[52] Hultgren SJ, Normark S, Abraham SN. Chaperone-assisted assembly and molecular
architecture of adhesive pili. Annu Rev Microbiol 1991,45:383–415.
[53] Baumler AJ, Tsolis RM, Heffron F. The lpf fimbrial operon mediates adhesion of
Salmonella typhimurium to murine Peyer’s patches. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996,93:279–
283.
[54] Baumler AJ, Winter SE, Thiennimitr P, Casadesus J. Intestinal and chronic infections:
Salmonella lifestyles in hostile environments. Environ Microbiol Rep 2011,3:508–517.
[55] Ledeboer NA, Frye JG, McClelland M, Jones BD. Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimu‐
rium requires the Lpf, Pef, and Tafi fimbriae for biofilm formation on HEp-2 tissue
culture cells and chicken intestinal epithelium. Infect Immun 2006,74:3156–3169.
246 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
[56] Austin JW, Sanders G, Kay WW, Collinson SK. Thin aggregative fimbriae enhance
Salmonella enteritidis biofilm formation. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1998,162:295–301.
[57] Raghunathan D, Wells TJ, Morris FC, Shaw RK, Bobat S, Peters SE, et al. SadA, a trimeric
autotransporter from Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, can promote biofilm
formation and provides limited protection against infection. Infect Immun 2011,79:4342–
4352.
[60] Kim SH, Wei CI. Molecular characterization of biofilm formation and attachment of
Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium DT104 on food contact surfaces. J Food Prot
2009,72:1841–1847.
[61] Crawford RW, Reeve KE, Gunn JS. Flagellated but not hyperfimbriated Salmonella
enterica serovar Typhimurium attaches to and forms biofilms on cholesterol-coated
surfaces. J Bacteriol 2010,192:2981–2990.
[62] Jennings ME, Quick LN, Ubol N, Shrom S, Dollahon N, Wilson JW. Characterization
of Salmonella type III secretion hyper-activity which results in biofilm-like cell aggre‐
gation. Plos One 2012,7:e33080.
[63] Ban GH, Kang DH, Yoon H. Transcriptional response of selected genes of Salmonella
enterica serovar Typhimurium biofilm cells during inactivation by superheated steam.
Int J Food Microbiol 2015,192:117–123.
[64] Hamilton S, Bongaerts RJ, Mulholland F, Cochrane B, Porter J, Lucchini S, et al. The
transcriptional programme of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium reveals a key
role for tryptophan metabolism in biofilms. BMC Genom 2009,10:599.
[65] Malcova M, Karasova D, Rychlik I. aroA and aroD mutations influence biofilm
formation in Salmonella enteritidis. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2009,291:44–49.
[66] Dong H, Zhang X, Pan Z, Peng D, Liu X. Identification of genes for biofilm formation
in a Salmonella enteritidis strain by transposon mutagenesis. Wei Sheng Wu Xue Bao
2008,48:869–873.
[67] Dong H, Peng D, Jiao X, Zhang X, Geng S, Liu X. Roles of the spiA gene from Salmonella
enteritidis in biofilm formation and virulence. Microbiology 2011,157:1798–1805.
[68] Lu Y, Chen S, Dong H, Sun H, Peng D, Liu X. Identification of genes responsible for
biofilm formation or virulence in Salmonella enterica serovar pullorum. Avian Dis
2012,56:134–143.
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 247
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
[72] Gerstel U, Park C, Romling U. Complex regulation of csgD promoter activity by global
regulatory proteins. Mol Microbiol 2003,49:639–654.
[73] Dong H, Peng D, Jiao X, Zhang X, Chen S, Lu Y, et al. Construction and characteriza‐
tion of an ompR gene deletion mutant from Salmonella enteritidis. Wei Sheng Wu Xue Bao
2011,51:1256–1262.
[74] Yoo AY, Yu JE, Yoo H, Lee TH, Lee WH, Oh JI, et al. Role of sigma factor E in regula‐
tion of Salmonella Agf expression. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2013,430:131–136.
[75] Huang J, Chen S, Huang K, Yang L, Wu B, Peng D. Identification of rpoE gene associated
with biofilm formation of Salmonella pullorum. Wei Sheng Wu Xue Bao 2015,55:156–163.
[76] Brown PK, Dozois CM, Nickerson CA, Zuppardo A, Terlonge J, Curtiss R, 3rd. MlrA,
a novel regulator of curli (AgF) and extracellular matrix synthesis by Escherichia coli
and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Mol Microbiol 2001,41:349–363.
[77] Romling U, Gomelsky M, Galperin MY. C-di-GMP: the dawning of a novel bacterial
signalling system. Mol Microbiol 2005,57:629–639.
[79] Jonas K, Edwards AN, Ahmad I, Romeo T, Romling U, Melefors O. Complex regula‐
tory network encompassing the Csr, c-di-GMP and motility systems of Salmonella
typhimurium. Environ Microbiol 2010,12:524–540.
[80] Ahmad I, Wigren E, Le Guyon S, Vekkeli S, Blanka A, El Mouali Y, et al. The EAL-like
protein STM1697 regulates virulence phenotypes, motility and biofilm formation in
Salmonella typhimurium. Mol Microbiol 2013,90:1216–1232.
[82] Mika F, Hengge R. Small regulatory RNAs in the control of motility and biofilm
formation in E. coli and Salmonella. Int J Mol Sci 2013,14:4560–4579.
248 Microbial Biofilms - Importance and Applications
[83] Boehm A, Vogel J. The csgD mRNA as a hub for signal integration via multiple small
RNAs. Mol Microbiol 2012,84:1–5.
[84] Bordeau V, Felden B. Curli synthesis and biofilm formation in enteric bacteria are
controlled by a dynamic small RNA module made up of a pseudoknot assisted by an
RNA chaperone. Nucleic Acids Res 2014,42:4682–4696.
[85] Monteiro C, Papenfort K, Hentrich K, Ahmad I, Le Guyon S, Reimann R, et al. Hfq and
Hfq-dependent small RNAs are major contributors to multicellular development in
Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. RNA Biol 2012,9:489–502.
[87] Smith JL, Fratamico PM, Yan X. Eavesdropping by bacteria: the role of SdiA in
Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium quorum sensing.
Foodborne Pathog Dis 2011,8:169–178.
[88] Liu Z, Que F, Liao L, Zhou M, You L, Zhao Q, et al. Study on the promotion of bacterial
biofilm formation by a Salmonella conjugative plasmid and the underlying mecha‐
nism. Plos One 2014,9:e109808.
[89] Bonafonte MA, Solano C, Sesma B, Alvarez M, Montuenga L, Garcia-Ros D, et al. The
relationship between glycogen synthesis, biofilm formation and virulence in Salmonel‐
la enteritidis. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2000,191:31–36.
[90] Solano C, Sesma B, Alvarez M, Urdaneta E, Garcia-Ros D, Calvo A, et al. Virulent strains
of Salmonella enteritidis disrupt the epithelial barrier of Caco-2 and HEp-2 cells. Arch
Microbiol 2001,175:46–51.
[91] Barak JD, Gorski L, Naraghi-Arani P, Charkowski AO. Salmonella enterica virulence
genes are required for bacterial attachment to plant tissue. Appl Environ Microbiol
2005,71:5685–5691.
[92] White AP, Gibson DL, Grassl GA, Kay WW, Finlay BB, Vallance BA, et al. Aggrega‐
tion via the red, dry, and rough morphotype is not a virulence adaptation in Salmonel‐
la enterica serovar Typhimurium. Infect Immun 2008,76:1048–1058.
[93] Borriello G, Lucibelli MG, Pesciaroli M, Carullo MR, Graziani C, Ammendola S, et al.
Diversity of Salmonella spp. serovars isolated from the intestines of water buffalo calves
with gastroenteritis. BMC Vet Res 2012,8:201.
[94] Pontes MH, Lee EJ, Choi J, Groisman EA. Salmonella promotes virulence by repres‐
sing cellulose production. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2015,112:5183–5188.
[95] Liu L, Tan S, Jun W, Smith A, Meng J, Bhagwat AA. Osmoregulated periplasmic glucans
are needed for competitive growth and biofilm formation by Salmonella enterica serovar
Biofilm Formation of Salmonella 249
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/62905
[96] Azriel S, Goren A, Rahav G, Gal-Mor O. The stringent response regulator DksA is
required for Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium growth in minimal medium,
motility, biofilm formation, and intestinal colonization. Infect Immun 2015,84:375–384.
[97] Baugh S, Ekanayaka AS, Piddock LJ, Webber MA. Loss of or inhibition of all multi‐
drug resistance efflux pumps of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium results in
impaired ability to form a biofilm. J Antimicrob Chemother 2012,67:2409–2417.
[98] Baugh S, Phillips CR, Ekanayaka AS, Piddock LJ, Webber MA. Inhibition of multi‐
drug efflux as a strategy to prevent biofilm formation. J Antimicrob Chemother
2014,69:673–681.
[99] Schlisselberg DB, Kler E, Kisluk G, Shachar D, Yaron S. Biofilm formation ability of
Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium acrAB mutants. Int J Antimicrob Agents
2015,46:456–459.
[100] Tabak M, Scher K, Hartog E, Romling U, Matthews KR, Chikindas ML, et al. Effect of
triclosan on Salmonella typhimurium at different growth stages and in biofilms. FEMS
Microbiol Lett 2007,267:200–206.